470 likes | 579 Views
Part-of-Speech Tagging. A Canonical Finite-State Task. The Tagging Task. Input: the lead paint is unsafe Output: the/Det lead/N paint/N is/V unsafe/Adj Uses: text-to-speech (how do we pronounce “lead”?) can write regexps like (Det) Adj* N+ over the output
E N D
Part-of-Speech Tagging A Canonical Finite-State Task 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
The Tagging Task Input: the lead paint is unsafe Output: the/Det lead/N paint/N is/V unsafe/Adj • Uses: • text-to-speech (how do we pronounce “lead”?) • can write regexps like (Det) Adj* N+ over the output • preprocessing to speed up parser (but a little dangerous) • if you know the tag, you can back off to it in other tasks 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Why Do We Care? Input: the lead paint is unsafe Output: the/Det lead/N paint/N is/V unsafe/Adj • The first statistical NLP task • Been done to death by different methods • Easy to evaluate (how many tags are correct?) • Canonical finite-state task • Can be done well with methods that look at local context • Though should “really” do it by parsing! 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Degree of Supervision • Supervised: Training corpus is tagged by humans • Unsupervised: Training corpus isn’t tagged • Partly supervised: Training corpus isn’t tagged, but you have a dictionary giving possible tags for each word • We’ll start with the supervised case and move to decreasing levels of supervision. 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Current Performance Input: the lead paint is unsafe Output: the/Det lead/N paint/N is/V unsafe/Adj • How many tags are correct? • About 97% currently • But baseline is already 90% • Baseline is performance of stupidest possible method • Tag every word with its most frequent tag • Tag unknown words as nouns 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
correct tags PN Verb Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun What Should We Look At? Bill directed a cortege of autos through the dunes PN Adj Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun Verb Verb Noun Verb Adj some possible tags for Prep each word (maybe more) …? Each unknown tag is constrained by its word and by the tags to its immediate left and right. But those tags are unknown too … 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
correct tags PN Verb Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun What Should We Look At? Bill directed a cortege of autos through the dunes PN Adj Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun Verb Verb Noun Verb Adj some possible tags for Prep each word (maybe more) …? Each unknown tag is constrained by its word and by the tags to its immediate left and right. But those tags are unknown too … 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
correct tags PN Verb Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun What Should We Look At? Bill directed a cortege of autos through the dunes PN Adj Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun Verb Verb Noun Verb Adj some possible tags for Prep each word (maybe more) …? Each unknown tag is constrained by its word and by the tags to its immediate left and right. But those tags are unknown too … 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Three Finite-State Approaches • Noisy Channel Model (statistical) real language X part-of-speech tags (n-gram model) insert terminals noisy channel X Y yucky language Y text want to recover X from Y 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Three Finite-State Approaches • Noisy Channel Model (statistical) • Deterministic baseline tagger composed with a cascade of fixup transducers • Nondeterministic tagger composed with a cascade of finite-state automata that act as filters 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Review: Noisy Channel real language X p(X) * p(Y | X) noisy channel X Y = yucky language Y p(X,Y) want to recover xX from yY choose x that maximizes p(x | y) or equivalently p(x,y) 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
a:a/0.7 b:b/0.3 .o. a:C/0.1 b:C/0.8 a:D/0.9 b:D/0.2 = a:C/0.07 b:C/0.24 a:D/0.63 b:D/0.06 Review: Noisy Channel p(X) * p(Y | X) = p(X,Y) Note p(x,y) sums to 1. Suppose y=“C”; what is best “x”? 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Review: Noisy Channel a:a/0.7 b:b/0.3 p(X) .o. * a:C/0.1 b:C/0.8 p(Y | X) a:D/0.9 b:D/0.2 = = p(X,Y) a:C/0.07 b:C/0.24 a:D/0.63 b:D/0.06 Suppose y=“C”; what is best “x”? 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
.o. * p(y | Y) C:C/1 Review: Noisy Channel a:a/0.7 b:b/0.3 p(X) .o. * a:C/0.1 b:C/0.8 p(Y | X) a:D/0.9 b:D/0.2 restrict just to paths compatible with output “C” = = p(X, y) a:C/0.07 b:C/0.24 best path 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
automaton: p(tag sequence) transducer: tags words .o. * p(y | Y) automaton: the observed words C:C/1 transducer: scores candidate tag seqs on their joint probability with obs words; pick best path Noisy Channel for Tagging a:a/0.7 b:b/0.3 p(X) “Markov Model” .o. * a:C/0.1 b:C/0.8 p(Y | X) a:D/0.9 b:D/0.2 “Unigram Replacement” “straight line” = = p(X, y) a:C/0.07 b:C/0.24 best path 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Markov Model (bigrams) Verb Det Start Prep Adj Noun Stop 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
0.3 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.1 Markov Model Verb Det Start Prep Adj Noun Stop 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
0.3 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.1 Markov Model Verb Det 0.8 Start Prep Adj Noun Stop 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Markov Model p(tag seq) Verb Det 0.8 0.3 0.7 Start Prep Adj 0.4 0.5 Noun Stop 0.2 0.1 Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.8 * 0.3 * 0.4 * 0.5 * 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Markov Model as an FSA p(tag seq) Verb Det 0.8 0.3 0.7 Start Prep Adj 0.4 0.5 Noun Stop 0.2 0.1 Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.8 * 0.3 * 0.4 * 0.5 * 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Markov Model as an FSA p(tag seq) Verb Det Det 0.8 Noun0.7 Adj 0.3 Start Prep Adj Noun0.5 Adj 0.4 Noun Stop 0.2 0.1 Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.8 * 0.3 * 0.4 * 0.5 * 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Markov Model (tag bigrams) p(tag seq) Det Det 0.8 Adj 0.3 Start Adj Noun0.5 Adj 0.4 Noun Stop 0.2 Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.8 * 0.3 * 0.4 * 0.5 * 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Noisy Channel for Tagging automaton: p(tag sequence) p(X) “Markov Model” .o. * p(Y | X) transducer: tags words “Unigram Replacement” .o. * p(y | Y) automaton: the observed words “straight line” = = transducer: scores candidate tag seqs on their joint probability with obs words; pick best path p(X, y) 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Verb Det Det 0.8 Noun0.7 Adj 0.3 Start … Noun:cortege/0.000001 Prep Noun:autos/0.001 Noun:Bill/0.002 Det:a/0.6 Adj Det:the/0.4 Noun0.5 Adj:cool/0.003 Adj 0.4 Adj:directed/0.0005 Noun Stop Adj:cortege/0.000001 … 0.1 0.2 Noisy Channel for Tagging p(X) .o. * p(Y | X) .o. * p(y | Y) the cool directed autos = = transducer: scores candidate tag seqs on their joint probability with obs words; we should pick best path p(X, y) 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Unigram Replacement Model p(word seq | tag seq) … Noun:cortege/0.000001 Noun:autos/0.001 sums to 1 Noun:Bill/0.002 Det:a/0.6 Det:the/0.4 sums to 1 Adj:cool/0.003 Adj:directed/0.0005 Adj:cortege/0.000001 … 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Verb Det … Noun:cortege/0.000001 Noun0.7 Det 0.8 Adj 0.3 Noun:autos/0.001 Start Noun:Bill/0.002 Det:a/0.6 Prep Det:the/0.4 Adj:cool/0.003 Adj:directed/0.0005 Adj Noun0.5 Adj:cortege/0.000001 … Adj 0.4 Noun Stop 0.1 0.2 Compose p(tag seq) Verb Det Det 0.8 Adj 0.3 Start Prep Adj Noun0.5 Adj 0.4 Noun Stop 0.2 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Verb Det … Noun:cortege/0.000001 Noun0.7 Det 0.8 Adj 0.3 Noun:autos/0.001 Start Noun:Bill/0.002 Det:a/0.6 Prep Det:the/0.4 Adj:cool/0.003 Adj:directed/0.0005 Adj Noun0.5 Adj:cortege/0.000001 … Adj 0.4 Noun Stop 0.1 0.2 Compose p(word seq, tag seq) = p(tag seq) * p(word seq | tag seq) Verb Det Det:a 0.48 Det:the 0.32 Adj:cool 0.0009 Adj:directed 0.00015 Adj:cortege 0.000003 Start Prep Adj Noun Stop N:cortege N:autos Adj:cool 0.0012 Adj:directed 0.00020 Adj:cortege 0.000004 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Observed Words as Straight-Line FSA word seq the cool directed autos 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
the cool directed autos Compose with p(word seq, tag seq) = p(tag seq) * p(word seq | tag seq) Verb Det Det:a 0.48 Det:the 0.32 Adj:cool 0.0009 Adj:directed 0.00015 Adj:cortege 0.000003 Start Prep Adj Noun Stop N:cortege N:autos Adj:cool 0.0012 Adj:directed 0.00020 Adj:cortege 0.000004 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
the cool directed autos why did this loop go away? Compose with p(word seq, tag seq) = p(tag seq) * p(word seq | tag seq) Verb Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:cool 0.0009 Start Prep Adj Noun Stop N:autos Adj:directed 0.00020 Adj 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
The best path: Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.32 * 0.0009 … the cool directed autos p(word seq, tag seq) = p(tag seq) * p(word seq | tag seq) Verb Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:cool 0.0009 Start Prep Adj Noun Stop N:autos Adj:directed 0.00020 Adj 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
In Fact, Paths Form a “Trellis” p(word seq, tag seq) Adj:cool 0.0009 Det Det Det Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:directed… Start Adj Adj Adj Adj Stop Noun:cool 0.007 Noun:autos… 0.2 Adj:directed… Noun Noun Noun Noun The best path: Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.32 * 0.0009 … the cool directed autos 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
2,2 0,0 1,1 2,1 3,1 3,4 1,2 1,3 2,3 3,3 1,4 2,4 3,2 3 2 0 1 4 3 1 2 4 0 The Trellis Shape Emerges from the Cross-Product Construction .o. All paths here are 5 words = 4,4 So all paths here must have 5 words on output side 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Actually, Trellis Isn’t Complete p(word seq, tag seq) Trellis has no Det Det or Det Stop arcs; why? Adj:cool 0.0009 Det Det Det Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:directed… Start Adj Adj Adj Adj Stop Noun:cool 0.007 Noun:autos… 0.2 Adj:directed… Noun Noun Noun Noun The best path: Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.32 * 0.0009 … the cool directed autos 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Actually, Trellis Isn’t Complete p(word seq, tag seq) Lattice is missing some other arcs; why? Adj:cool 0.0009 Det Det Det Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:directed… Start Adj Adj Adj Adj Stop Noun:cool 0.007 Noun:autos… 0.2 Adj:directed… Noun Noun Noun Noun The best path: Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.32 * 0.0009 … the cool directed autos 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Actually, Trellis Isn’t Complete p(word seq, tag seq) Lattice is missing some states; why? Adj:cool 0.0009 Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:directed… Start Adj Adj Stop Noun:cool 0.007 Noun:autos… 0.2 Adj:directed… Noun Noun Noun The best path: Start Det Adj Adj Noun Stop = 0.32 * 0.0009 … the cool directed autos 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Adj:cool 0.0009 Det Det Det Det Det:the 0.32 Adj:directed… Start Adj Adj Adj Adj Stop Noun:cool 0.007 Noun:autos… 0.2 Adj:directed… Noun Noun Noun Noun Find best path from Start to Stop • Use dynamic programming – like prob. parsing: • What is best path from Start to each node? • Work from left to right • Each node stores its best path from Start (as probability plus one backpointer) • Special acyclic case of Dijkstra’s shortest-path alg. • Faster if some arcs/states are absent 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
probs from tag bigram model 0.4 0.6 Start PN Verb Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun Stop 0.001 probs from unigram replacement Bill directed a cortege of autos through the dunes In Summary • We are modeling p(word seq, tag seq) • The tags are hidden, but we see the words • Is tag sequence X likely with these words? • Noisy channel model is a “Hidden Markov Model”: • Find X that maximizes probability product 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Start PN Verb Det … Bill directed a … p( ) = p(Start) * p(PN | Start) * p(Verb | Start PN) * p(Det | Start PN Verb) * … * p(Bill | Start PN Verb …) * p(directed | Bill, Start PN Verb Det …) * p(a | Bill directed, Start PN Verb Det …) * … Another Viewpoint • We are modeling p(word seq, tag seq) • Why not use chain rule + some kind of backoff? • Actually, we are! 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Start PN Verb Det … Bill directed a … p( ) Start PN Verb Det Noun Prep Noun Prep Det Noun Stop Bill directed a cortege of autos through the dunes Another Viewpoint • We are modeling p(word seq, tag seq) • Why not use chain rule + some kind of backoff? • Actually, we are! = p(Start) * p(PN | Start) * p(Verb | Start PN) * p(Det | Start PN Verb) * … * p(Bill | Start PN Verb …) * p(directed | Bill, Start PN Verb Det …) * p(a | Bill directed, Start PN Verb Det …) * … 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Three Finite-State Approaches • Noisy Channel Model (statistical) • Deterministic baseline tagger composed with a cascade of fixup transducers • Nondeterministic tagger composed with a cascade of finite-state automata that act as filters 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Another FST Paradigm: Successive Fixups • Like successive markups but alter • Morphology • Phonology • Part-of-speech tagging • … Initial annotation input Fixup 1 Fixup 3 Fixup 2 output 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
figure from Brill’s thesis Transformation-Based Tagging (Brill 1995) 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
figure from Brill’s thesis NN @ VB // TO _ VBP @ VB // ... _ etc. Transformations Learned BaselineTag* Compose this cascade of FSTs. Gets a big FST that does the initial tagging and the sequence of fixups “all at once.” 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
figure from Brill’s thesis Initial Tagging of OOV Words 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Three Finite-State Approaches • Noisy Channel Model (statistical) • Deterministic baseline tagger composed with a cascade of fixup transducers • Nondeterministic tagger composed with a cascade of finite-state automata that act as filters 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner
Variations • Multiple tags per word • Transformations to knock some of them out • How to encode multiple tags and knockouts? • Use the above for partly supervised learning • Supervised: You have a tagged training corpus • Unsupervised: You have an untagged training corpus • Here: You have an untagged training corpus and a dictionary giving possible tags for each word 600.465 - Intro to NLP - J. Eisner